Home - Piper Piper Pratt & Whitney PT6A-42A, 600 shp Six Seats 274 ktas / 507 km/h Max Cruise 1,484 nm / 2,668 km Range Garmin G3000 Avionics Suite Pratt & Whitney PT6A-42A, 500 shp Six Seats 260 ktas / 482 km/h Max Cruise 1,000 nm / 1,852 km Range Garmin G1000 Avionics Suite 213 ktas / 395 km/h Max Cruise 1,343 nm / 2,487 km Range Garmin G1000 Avionics Suite 213 ktas / 395 km/h Max Cruise 1,343 nm / 2,487 km Range Garmin G1000 Avionics Suite (2) Continental TSIO-360-RB 220 hp ea Six Seats / Club Seating 200 ktas / 370 km/h Max Cruise 828 nm / 1,53

3 km Range Garmin G1000 Avionics Suite 162 ktas / 300 km/h 75% Power Cruise 700 nm / 1,296 km Range Garmin G1000 Avionics Suite 137 ktas / 254 km/h Max Cruise 880 nm / 1,630 km Range Garmin G500 Avionics Suite 128 ktas / 237 km/h Max Cruising 522 nm / 967 km Range Garmin G1000 Avionics Suite 123 ktas / 228 km/h 75% Power 848 nm / 1,570 km Range Garmin G1000 Avionics Suite 115 ktas / 217 km/h Max Cruise 513 nm / 950 km Range Garmin G500 Avionics Suite Get more for your money More cabin, more useful load, for $899,000 NADA – National Automobile Dealers Association  January 26 - January 29 Avalon  February 2

8 - March 5 Women in Aviation  March 2 - March 4 CONEXPO  March 7 - March 11 Sun ‘n Fun  April 4 - April 9 AERO Friedrichshafen  April 5 - April 8 EBACE  May 22 - May 24 EAA AirVenture  July 24 - July 30 LABACE  August 15 - August 20 MMOPA  September 13 - September 17 Piper Aircraft History - the Aviation Answer Man Copyright 2000-2004, 2012, 2014 by R.Harris All Rights Reserved A modified version of this article appeared in the genreal aviation magazine InFlight USA, 2000-2001 [NOTE: If using a nomrally configured web browser, hold cursor still, over pictures, for their captions.] Beginnnings Piper Aircraft Corporation started in 1927, as the Taylor Brothers Aircraft Company, in Rochester, New York.

It was the product of two enterprising brothers -- Gordon and C.Gilbert Taylor (shown at right, Gordon to the left of Gilbert) -- who (with the help of their mechanically inclined British-American immigrant father) had developed the Taylor Chummy (below,left), a compact, simple, 2-seat (side-by-side), high-winged taildragger. This was a time of biplanes (airplanes with two wings, one above the other), rather than monoplanes (airplanes with just one wing). Biplanes, like the trusted deHavilland DH-4 (below left), had long been valued for the lifting power of their extra wing area, and for the strength created by the "box-truss" arrangement of the airplane's frame ("airframe") created by the network of braces and wires that held the upper and lower wing assemblies together. Monoplanes -- though cleaner, simpler and more efficient -- were generally thought of as flimsy, and regarded with suspicion.

But in April of 1927, all that began to change when a Ryan monoplane, the Spirit of St.Louis (right), piloted by Charles Lindbergh, succeeded in making the first solo non-stop crossing of an ocean -- flying from New York to Paris across the Atlantic. One of the contributing factors in Lindbergh's success was the aerodyamically "clean" shape of his monoplane. Without the drag-producing, traditional biplane maze of wing struts and wires, his monoplane was able to slice through the air more easily, going faster and farther on a gallon of fuel than a typical biplane could. Suddenly, monoplanes became credible and very attractive. Among the aviation pioneers who saw value in monoplanes was C. Gilbert Taylor. His original Chummy, in fact, looked very much like a miniature replica of the Spirit of St. Louis. Early development looked promising, but a crash killed Gordon. Gilbert (reportedly distraught over the loss of his brother) abandoned the Rochester airfield, and moved his business to Bradford, Pennsylvania.

In a time when Pennsylvania was a dominant source of crude oil for America's industrial and transportation machines, Bradford was doing well, and some of its people had spare money to invest. Gilbert Taylor re-organized and revived his company in Bradford, financing it with local money. Local investors designated one of their own -- oilman William T. Piper, Sr. (right) -- as the company's Treasurer. Piper and Taylor would begin a long, tiring disagreement over which was better -- the expensive, powerful, custom-crafted plane that Taylor envisioned, or the cheap, simple, mass-produced "everyman's airplane" that Bill Piper longed to produce. As Taylor sought to rebuild his company, the stock market crashed, and the Great Depression marched in, stomping on everyone's ambitions. The Chummy's 90-horsepower radial engine was too costly, and the plane had to be redesigned as a streamlined, tandem-seating plane, powered by a dinky 30-hp "Tiger Kitten" engine. Though the engine was not kept for long, it gave rise to the airplane's name, "the Cub." Called the Cub E-2, the plane stumbled onto the Depression market in about 1931.

But it was too late. Mired in debt, Taylor declared bankruptcy, and Piper bought the company's remaining assets for $761. The J-3 Cub Takes Off Though officially renaming Taylor as company president, Piper took over the design when Taylor fell ill. He allowed a young, volunteer "aeronautical engineer" named Walter Jamoneau to tinker with Taylor's design. Jamoneau created a sensation with his refined version of the E-2: the streamlined 35/40-hp J-2 Cub, followed by an improved 50-hp J-3 Cub -- a two-seat (tandem), cloth-covered, high-wing, taildragger. At a time when the public could no longer afford the big, powerful expensive planes of the 1920's, the tiny, cheap Cub found ready acceptance. Though a slow, weak "puddle jumper," its low cost of purchase, low cost of operation, gentle flying characteristics, and ability to land and takeoff from almost any small flat area, made it enormously practical, simple to fly, seemingly safe, and popular. As big-plane companies disappeared in the Great Depression, Piper soared.

Available only in bright yellow, the J-3 Cub could be seen everywhere. It became one of the most important airplanes in history, and the most widely-used American-made light plane for three decades. It was especially important as America's most popular training plane (before the development of the side-by-side, tricycle-geared, Cessna 150, in about 1960). Piper moved the company to an abandoned silk mill, in Lock Haven, Pennsylvania. The new Piper factory, patterned on Ford Motor Company's innovative, efficient "assembly line" concept, turned out thousands of cheap, popular airplanes. [It is worth mentioning that Gilbert Taylor, the Cub's designer, went on to create the Taylor Aircraft Co., and developed an alternative to the J-3 Cub with side-by-side seating, called the Taylorcraft (shown here in front of a Cub).

Though never as popular as Piper's J-3 Cub, this gentle, efficient, popular plane -- in various versions -- has been in and out of production since the 1930's, and has been manufactured as recently as 1992.] Cubs at War As America began to expect being dragged into World War II, the Piper Cub was used in the thousands in the "Civilian Pilot Training Program" (CPTP), which trained over 60,000 Americans to fly, preparing America's airpower future for the War. Throughout WWII, the Cub was used for training, and most of America's combat pilots would first learn to fly in a Cub. During World War II, all the Cubs found service in the military, or in the Civil Air Patrol -- a militarized civilian organization providing aviation support in the U.S. -- freeing military aircraft for the war. CAP planes flew coastal and border patrol, search-and-rescue, courier missions and many other non-combat operations across the nation during WWII, and Pipers' planes were very prominent participants in CAP service. In olive-drab green paint, the Cub (officially designated "L-4") also became the pre-eminent military "Grasshopper" plane.

Cubs, and other "L-planes" (like the Aeronca Champ, Stinsons, Porterfields and Luscombes) were painted in military colors, and sent to fly countless military missions. These tiny taildraggers, mostly two-seat, rag-winged "puddle jumpers" -- with strong backing from General Dwight Eisenhower, Supreme Allied Commander in Europe (who learned to fly in a Cub) -- became the Army's main battlefield observation platforms, and were used for most artillery spotting and U.S. coastal submarine patrol. Reconnaisance, missions, too, were commonly appointed to these "low-and-slow" flyers, because they could get a much better look at the objective than fast-and-high fighter planes. Grasshopper Cubs were used for ferrying generals and the wounded between battlefields and rear areas, and for moving small-but-critical supplies and communications, and maintaining liason (hence the "L" designation) between various Army groups. In a time when there were no helicopters, the L-4 and its kin created miitary "ground-support aviation" -- a critical mission which would be gradually shifted mostly to modern helicopters.

Early Cub Variants - wider, longer, stronger, faster Multiple variations of the Cub were been built, as well. A 75-hp side-by-side version of the Cub was built as the "J-4 Cub Coupe", and a stretched 90-hp model, the "J-5 Cub Cruiser," accommodated 3 skinny people (actually, a skinny kid and an adult or two), The J-5 was modified as the HE-1 to carry a stretcher in the aft fuselage and tailboom, with a hatch across the top of the plane that opened to allow easy loading and unloading -- providing safe and ready transport of wounded servicemen from combat zones to medical facilities. Post-War Rag-Wing Taildraggers Following the war, Piper returned to mass-production of its civilian line, with minor but useful modifications. Emphasizing a new era, Piper changed its model numbers, replacing of the traditional "J-" (as in "Jamoneau) with "PA-" (as in "Piper Aircraft"). A streamlined cowling was developed, fully-enclosing the engine of the J-3 Cub (which became the slightly faster "PA-11 Cub").

The same modification sped up triple-seat J-5 Cub Cruiser which became the "PA-12 Cub Cruiser." To fit (officially, if not safely) four people, the PA-12 was widenened, strengthened, and boosted to 115 hp and 100-mph speed, to become the "PA-16 Clipper" -- evoking the image of the famous fast "Clipper" sailing ships. Pan American Airlines, however, claimed "Clipper" as the trade name for their ocean-spanning airliners -- most famously the "China Clipper" flying boats -- and forced Piper to switch their little plane's name to something else. So Piper renamed the Clipper as the "PA-16 Family Cruiser." These latter designs would lead Piper in a new direction, away from the crude, utilitarian Cub, and towards comfortable, social air travel -- while still following the construction methods that had made the Cub affordable, durable and practical.

But the Cub remained a popular concept, and endured in higher-powered versions, up to 150 horsepower, as the "PA-18 Super Cub" (left), and the line continued in production until 1992 -- an incredible lifetime for a 1930's-era basic design. The Super Cub became a legendary force in "bush flying" -- around the world -- operating in remote areas and open fields and clearings, or on floats in wilderness lakes and rivers, or on skis anywhere a flat patch of snow could be found. Since the 1930s many versions of the Cub and SuperCub have been built (Variants or imitations, of sorts, are manufactured today by CubCrafters and a metal-skinned imitation of the SuperCub is popular as the Aviat Husky.) (NOTE: For more on the Piper Cub and its variants, see the article on the Piper Cub in the "8 Great Aircraft" series, on this website.) Short-Wing Pipers -- the simple, low-cost, fixed-gear PA-28 Cherokee.

The Comanche: - Piper's speedy single Piper's first all-metal, strutless, retractrable-geared, semi-monocoque plane, appearing in the late 1950's, was the sleek PA-24 Comanche, which abandoned the heavy steel-tube truss inner frame that had characterized all Pipers up to this time. The result was a light, high-performance airplane. The Comanche was a streamlined, low-wing, 4-seater, with drag-reducing retractable landing gear and a precisely-contoured "laminar-flow" wing for minimum drag. With its modern features, the fast, efficient Comanche which cruised at well over 160 mph, for long distances. The Comanche competed fairly successfully with the popular Beech Bonanza. Early models struggled along on 180 hp, so later 250/260-hp models were preferred. Even a 400-hp model was briefly produced (shown here with tip tanks to feed its thirsty engine). The Comanche's signature virtue, apart from good looks and efficient, speedy performance, was its spectacular range -- far beyond the limits of any passenger's bladder.

Adventurer Max Conrad would set a number of world records in his Comanche, including transoceanic flights performed with extra internal tanks. The Comanche would continue in production for over a decade, and eventually lead to one of Piper's most admired twins (See Twin Comanche, below). The Cherokee A Modern Plane for the Masses In 1953, the Pipers called on the modern-lightplane expert they'd lunched with a couple of years earlier -- Fred Weick (then working on a new kind of cropduster plane at Texas A&M University) -- inviting Weick to come and help Piper Aircaft Co. develop a new, modern, metal-skinned light plane. Weick, with one of Bill Piper's sons, Howard "Pug" Piper, started a new development facility in Vero Beach, Florida, where they began developing new single-engined airplane designs with the help of engineers Karl Bergey, John Thorp, Bob Lipinsky and Henry Hoeltje.

As a result, the "short-wing Piper" line was replaced in the early 1960's by the aluminum-skinned, low-wing PA-28 "Cherokee" line, built at the new facility in Vero Beach. This was to be the beginnning of another line of fabulously popular Piper planes -- radically different from the Piper Cub and its rag-winged offspring. The Cherokee line started with the 4-seat Cherokee 150 (model variant numbers in the Cherokee line match each plane's approximate engine horsepower). Like the Comanche before it, the Cherokee used "semi-monocoque" construction: a carefully-shaped aluminum skin, wrapped around bulkheads, "formers" and rings, and stiffened with "longerons" and "stringers." Pound-for-pound, this simple construction technique tended to be stronger than the complex steel-tube truss construction of traditional planes (like the Cub and the short-wing Pipers). Earlier manufacturing techniques to form and join the semi-monocoque metal parts had been complex and expensive, as reflected in the high price of the Comanche.

The team of engineers (chiefly Weick, Bergey and Thorp), however, carefully designed the Cherokee's airframe to be simpler and lighter than the Comanche (see the skeleton, below). Another hallmark of the Cherokee was its simple, fat, rectangular wing -- shaped much like a Hershey chocolate bar -- which permitted many of the same gentle handling characteristics as the "rag-covered" short-wing Pipers. The wing had a few other benefits, too. Its fat center, about halfway back from the wing's leading edge, permitted the installation of a single, large main spar, saving the weight and construction complexity of a typical multi-spar wing. And, best of all, the wing needed no drag-producing external bracing struts -- unlike the older Pipers, and even the newer Cessnas. The wing also stayed the same shape, from the wing root (next to the fuselage) almost all the way to the wingtip -- permitting efficient mass-production of the wing sections. The cheap, well-mannered "Hershey-bar" wing would continue on all Cherokee planes until the mid-1970's.

Another key Cherokee characteristic was the use of countless subtle techniques to reduce drag and weight, and economize on construction costs. The horizontal tail on most planes had typically been a combination of movable "elevator" surface attached to the trailing edge of a rigid horizontal stablizer (see the Cessna in background at left); on the Cherokee (in foreground at left) it was a simple, one-piece, all-moving "stabilator," mounted so as to provide the stabilizing influence of a rigid horizontal stabilizer, with the pitch control of a moveable elevator. It was smaller than conventional horizontal tails, and used a fraction of the parts that other tails required. The absence of a hinge joint (which on other planes joined the horizontal stabilizer and elevator) eliminated some drag, as did the smaller overall size of the stabilator. To save weight and cost, it had curved indentations -- called "beading" -- running from front to back, for stiffness without reinforcing internal parts. Other efficiency techniques included using molded plastic and fiberglass for the interior, and for the complex multiple-curve pieces of the exterior, such as the nose cowling, stabilator, and wingtips.

Overall, the net effect of the Cherokee's thrifty design yielded a 4-seat plane that used half as many parts as the Comanche -- with a corresponding reduction in manufacturing and maintenance costs. Over the next few decades, the efficient Cherokee line would grow to include planes ranging from a 2-seat trainer to a 7-seat light twin -- becoming so popular a basic design that over 50,000 Cherokee variants would be sold worldwide, making the basic Cherokee design one of the most successful designs in the history of aviation. Compared to the earlier rag-wing Piper Tri-Pacer and its kin, the Cherokee 150/160 offered real comfort, without sacrificing speed and efficiency. It could easily cruise as fast as the Tri-Pacer (125-130mph), on the same horsepower as the Tri-Pacer, while offering a comfortable 42-inch-wide cabin -- compared to the cramped, 35-inch-wide cabin of the Tri-Pacer, and it generally had better flying characteristics all-around.

It soon became apparent, however, that the underpowered (150-horsepower) 4-seat Cherokee 150 shared a limitation of the Tri-Pacer: it could not lift four normal-sized adults, let alone their baggage, if the fuel tanks were full. So Piper quickly engineered a Cherokee 160 -- essentially the same plane, but with an extra 10 horses under the hood. The Cherokee 160 could officially squeeze 4 people (at the FAA's official 170-pounds-per-person) and full fuel into the compact airframe, and safely lift the whole collection off the ground. But the Cherokee 160's sea-level performance figures faded quickly on a hot or humid day, or when flying from high-altitude airports in the high plains or mountain areas. And if the pilot included much in the way of optional instruments and radios, or even baggage, the Cherokee 160 was quickly overloaded.

Still, the Cherokee 160 gave Piper a popular, cost-effective competitor to Cessna's super-popular 172/Skyhawk (left), which had been eating Piper's lunch since its debut in the late 1950's, when the Skyhawk stole the thunder from Piper's popular Tri-Pacer. The Cherokee 160 put Piper clearly back in competition with Cessna for the low-end, 4-seat lightplane market. But Piper wasn't about to rest on its laurels. These were the prosperous, booming 1960's, when people had money to spend on airplanes. They were constantly buying bigger and better. And Piper wanted to sell it to them. The smaller Cherokees were soon greeted by the birth of a bigger brother. Piper developed the 180-hp Cherokee 180 (right), with enough power to allow the pilot to safely fill both the fuel tanks and all four seats (even if the passengers weighed 200 pounds each), with room left over for optional instruments, radios and baggage.

The roomy plane, powered by a smooth-running six-cylinder engine, quickly won over hundreds of buyers, and would attract thousands over the coming few decades. The Cherokee 180 (later renamed briefly as the "Cherokee C" or "Challenger") gave the Cessna 172/Skyhawk its most serious competition ever, an intense and successful rivalry that would continue well into the 21st century. By stripping the back seats out of the Cherokee 150, and cutting other amenities, Piper produced the Cherokee 140, which became enormously popular as a starter airplane, and basic 2-seat trainer. Though the 140 had an optional back "bench" seat, it was usually empty because of the limited power and load capacity of the 140. However, the 140 excelled as a trainer because of its gentle flying manners, more-than-adequate power for two, wide-set tricycle gear (ideal when landing in in crosswinds or turbulence), large, well-organized instrument panel, and low purchase and operating costs.

Further, with an extra 40-85 hp more than most 2-seaters, the Cherokee 140 sped along at over 130 mph (easily 15 mph faster than the Cessna 150, and over 50 mph faster than it's Piper training predecessor, the Cub). And -- of course -- the Cherokee 140 had a decisive advantage over other "trainer" planes at the bottom of the price spectrum: room for an additional pair of passengers that could be carried when fuel tanks were half-empty. As a good primary trainer, the Cherokee 140 -- also offered in a trainer-only version as the "FliteLiner 140" -- fostered brand loyalty among student pilots, who would move on from their flight school training to rent and buy their own planes for casual and business use. For those who trained in the gentle, comfortable Cherokee 140, their first choice was often another Piper -- especially another Cherokee. The littlest Cherokees would become one of Piper's most valuable sales tools for promoting a whole new line of larger Cherokees and modern Pipers.

Cherokee Competitors The Cherokee 140, however, would never outsell the trainer that had taken the place of the Piper Cub in the late 1950's -- the wildly-popular Cessna 150 (right). The Cessna 150 had been designed from the start as a 2-seater, and was smaller and lighter, with fewer parts, and flew just fine with a smaller engine -- with the result that it was a much cheaper trainer to buy and operate than Piper's Cherokee 140. Despite the many virtues of the Cherokee 140, most flight schools continued to train pilots with Cessna 150's -- building brand loyalty to Cessna, and helping to fuel Cessna's acceleration past Piper as the most popular maker of light planes. About this time, Beech Aircraft -- who dominated the market for high-performance, single-engine, retractable-geared planes with its Beech Bonanza -- tried to elbow its way into the low-end singles market with the Beech Musketeer (left), a fixed-gear Cherokee look-alike.

But the notoriously slow and expensive Musketeer -- though sturdy and comfortable -- was no match for the far more affordable, efficient and speedy Cherokees. Despite being offered in a broad array of versions like the Cherokee, Beech's Musketeer line (even when re-christened Sport, Sundowner, Super and Sierra) failed to gain a major share of the single-engine market. The Musketeers would only be sold by the hundreds, and discontinued after less than a decade -- while the Cherokees, decade after decade, would be sold by the thousands upon thousands. Cherokee Growth: More Muscle In 1964, Piper put some real muscle into the Cherokee with the 235-hp Cherokee 235 (later the "Cherokee D" or "Charger"). To lift a bigger payload, and the bigger engine needed to pull it, the Cherokee wing was stretched another foot on each end, and the extended wingtips held extra fuel to feed the thirsty big engine. This Cherokee, too, was a 4-seater. Up to this point, all Cherokees (except the stripped-down 2-seat trainers) were 4-seat, fixed-gear airplanes.

The Cherokee 235 provided exceptional hauling, climb and short-field performance, and could lift four big people, and their luggage, along with full fuel, and speed through the air at about 150-160 miles per hour -- putting it squarely in competiton with Cessna's coveted Cessna 182/Skylane, and even making Beech Bonanza buyers think twice. Good Times The Piper Cherokee would do much to help the Piper Company catch-up to arch-rival Cessna Aircraft, though it would never quite be enough to put Piper back in the lead as the world's most prolific maker of light planes. Nevertheless, chiefly because of the popularity of the Cherokee, Piper would at least hold on to the #2 spot for most of the next two decades. In terms of the total number of airplanes built and sold, only Cessna would come close. Under the energetic leadership of Bill Piper's sons -- Tony (who led the company, while officially leaving the title of Chairman of the Board to his father), "Pug" (who oversaw design developments) and Bill, Jr. (who kept everyone working smoothly together) -- the company had continued to innovate and grow.

However, in 1960, Tony quit the company, and moved away to manage family property in Texas, leaving the leadership mostly to "Pug." Nevertheless, the 1960's were profitable times for the general-aviation industry, and Piper shared in the wealth. The Twin Comanche: - Piper's sleek light twin While the Piper Cherokee had proven a far more affordable and popular aircraft for most buyers, and had a respectable safety record, Piper's first all-metal single-engine plane -- its sleek, retractable-geared PA-24 Comanche -- still had additional value to bring to market. The Comanche continued to sell through the 1960's, challenging the V-tailed Beech Bonanza and 210 Cessna Centurion. Taking the sleek Comanche a step further (as Beech had done with the Bonanza, ultimately creating the Baron), a twin-engined version of Piper's Comanche -- the PA-30 Twin Comanche -- was developed.

Though a bit under-powered for a light twin (a pair of 160-hp Lycomings), with limited hauling capacity (4-6 seats, which couldn't always be filled if the tanks were full) and consequently limited range, it was fast and efficient (turbo'ed models topping 220 mph) -- especially when compared to the Apache and some competitors' light twins (most of which used much larger engines to fly at Twin Comanche speeds). Early models easily topped cruising over 180 mph, and later models neared 200 mph, topping 9 miles per gallon -- with turbocharged models topping 220mph at at 10,000 feet, or cruising over weather (with oxygen masks) at 25,000 feet. A few were even fitted with deicing boots to penetrate the worst flyable weather.) Late models ranged up to 800-1,000 miles, or more, and could extend range with optional tip tanks.

The "bulletproof" 160-hp Lycoming engines (already having been proven in the Tri-Pacer, Apache and Cherokee) proved extremely economical -- not only for their low fuel consumption, but also for their very high reliability -- cutting costly maintenance. With the low purchase and operating costs of a very-light-twin, the Twin Comanche began to replace the aging Apaches as the preferred civilian twin-engine training plane. The Twin Comanche suffered, however, from a nasty reputation born of its heavy early use as a training plane. During "engine-out" training and stall training, the Twin Comanche would too-often slip into a spin, and kill all aboard. This was a particular problem if the "critical engine" (the left side engine), failed -- leaving only the right engine to provide thrust. In any engine failure on a normal twin, the drag of the dead engine on one side, and the overpowering thrust of the good engine on the other side, causes the plane to try to "yaw" and roll towards the dead engine. The pilot must use the rudder heavily (and, in slow flight, also the ailerons) to steer against this left twist, to keep the plane flying properly.

Because both engines on most twins (including early Twin Comanches) turn clockwise (as viewed from the back), their prop's downswing (and resulting greatest bite during low-speed / high-angle-of-attack flight) -- and hence their predominant thrust -- comes more from the right side of the prop arc, rather than the left side. This results in some asymmetry of thrust that tends to try and pull the plane to the left (see diagram below, left - TOP half: "normal matching engines"). This is not much of a problem if both engines are turning. Minor differences in thrust, or simply the aerodynamic force available to the rudder from the slipstream from both propellers, And in an "engine-out" situation, it's normally NOT a severe problem... IF the LEFT engine, alone, is running -- since the greater airflow is close to the airplane centerline (the right side of the left prop arc).

But (or a normal plane) if the "critical engine" (the left engine) fails, and the right engine is providing all the thrust, the thrust comes mostly from the right side of the right engine's prop arc -- far to the right of the airplane centerline -- creating a powerful tendency to yaw to the left (and roll over to the to the left, as well, if the airplane is flying slow, at nose-high angle of attack). Under these conditions, at low speeds -- where the rudder has little airflow and where the wing is dangerously near the stalling point -- the plane then becomes susceptible to a stall, and/or uncontrollable yawing and/or rolling to the left, sometimes leading to an uncontrolled spin, or other loss of control (such as single-engine "rollover") -- which the pilot may not be able to recover from before crashing. These low-speed control problems during an engine failure are among the chief causes of fatal accidents in "light twin" aircraft. Risky engine-out training, at low speeds, is an important and common training practice for pilots earning their "multi-engine" rating.

This caused the Twin Comanche -- actually designed for speed, but being widely used as a trainer -- to soon develop a nasty reputation as a killer. To counter the effects of failure of the "critical engine," and reduce the spin and rollover risk, Piper had the engines re-designed as mirror opposites, with the props turning in opposite directions ("counter-rotating"), creating the PA-39 Twin Comanche C/R. On the C/R model, both propellers' down-swings were towards the inboard (fuselage) side of the engines, near the airplane centerline (see diagram below, left - BOTTOM half: "counter-rotating engines").-- preveting extreme asymmetrical thrust during "critical engine" failures. Whether because of the counter-rotating engines, or in spite of them, the Twin Comanche crash rate dropped (one reporter's superficial study of NTSB and FAA data concluded that the Twin Comanche's crash rate had dropped by two-thirds). Counter-rotating engines were subsequently fitted to all new Piper piston-engined twins.

The Comanche / Twin Comanche design (most parts were interchangeable) was an expensive plane to make, largely because it used a super-refined "laminar-flow" wing, which required very precise manufacturing. In 1972 -- during a decline in twin sales (complicated by the fact that Piper now had too many twin-engined designs) -- a flood destroyed Piper's Lock Haven plant, including the very expensive tooling and jigs for the Comanche line, so Piper dropped the Comanche line altogether. Today, used Comanches and Twin Comanches -- still popular as used planes -- are highly prized for their speed, efficiency and racy good looks. Many modifications are available to improve their performance, and one small company is producing the speedy "Bailey Bullet" -- heavily-modified used Twin Comanches, with new engines and extensive improvements. Cabin-Class Twins At the other end of the spectrum, Piper decided to build a "cabin-class" twin -- a "medium" twin with enough room for separate cockpit and passenger cabins, with an aisle between the seats, and almost enough headroom for people to walk down the aisle to their seats.

This would give them a way to keep customers from outgrowing the Piper line, and switching to the cabin-class Queen Airs of Beech, or 400-series of Cessna. Thus the "Navajo" was born. Over the next several years, it would undego several incarnations, including: the "Navajo-P", A pressurized version, permitting high-altitude flight over bad weather; the "Navajo Chieftain", stretched version, which would become popular with commuter airlines, and eventually... the fast "Cheyenne" -- a turboprop-powered version of the pressurized "Navajo-P" Reversing course, the Cheyenne airframe, refitted with piston engines, would produce the replacement for the Navajo-P: the Mojave. With their spacious capacity, many seats, efficiency, affordability and simplicity, the The Navajo, and especially the Chieftain became widely used as shorrt-haul "commuter" and "feeder" airliners, ranging from the solid pavement of suburbia and the big city, to the icy, remote hinterlands of Alaska.

DaddyBobPhotos.com - Aircraft Piper Aircraft, Inc., is a manufacturer of general aviation aircraft, located at the Vero Beach Municipal Airport in Vero Beach, Florida. Along with Beechcraft and Cessna, it is considered one of the "Big Three" in the field of general aviation manufacturing. Between its founding in 1927 and the end of 2009, the company had produced 144,000 aircraft in 160 certified models, of which 90,000 are still flying. Piper's J-3 Cub, a single-engine, high-wing, two-seater, was the first inexpensive training aircraft produced in large numbers. Many former military examples were sold to civilian owners over the 1950-1995 period and seem certain to see many more years in recreational use. The PA-28 Cherokee has been one of the company's most successful products. Both this design and the twin-engined PA-34 Seneca are used for pilot training around the world.

The PA-23 Apache was one of the first aircraft associated with the term "air taxi", although it was superseded in that role by faster and more spacious designs from competitors Beechcraft and Cessna. Beginning production in 1965, the PA-32 series provided six- or seven-seat, single-engine designs based on the smaller Cherokee. Variously named Cherokee Six, Lance, and Saratoga, these were available as both fixed- and retractable-gear models and also with normally aspirated, fuel-injected, and turbocharged engines. The PA-32s proved popular with private owners, air taxi, and freight companies. Production of the Saratoga-II HPs and Saratoga TCs ended in 2009. On 21 January 2010 the company announced it had licenced the CZAW SportCruiser and intended to market it as the PiperSport.

Piper CEO Kevin Gould said, "The PiperSport is an amazing entry-level aircraft that will bring new customers into Piper and lead the way for those customers to step up into more sophisticated and higher performance aircraft within our line over time." In January 2011, the licensing agreement with Piper was abruptly ended with Piper CEO Geoffrey Berger saying "the company has a different business perspective and approach to the market than Czech Sport Aircraft". Summary of aircraft built by Piper Aircraft Model name 1000+ images about Piper Aircraft on Pinterest | Vero beach florida, Ea and 75th birthday Piper Dakota Series More The Piper Aircraft Corporation, out of its Lock Haven, Pennsylv Home Page The Piper Comanche Story The Piper Aircraft Corporation, out of its Lock Haven, Pennsylvania, factory, manufactured its Comanche line of piston singles (designated PA-24s) and twins (designated as PA-30s or PA-39s) between 1958 and 1972. These airplanes turned out to be some of the more popular models ever built by Piper or any other general aviation manufacturer.

With a total of some 4,834 single-engine sales and 2,155 sales of Twin Comanches, the Comanche line looked invincible throughout general aviation's heady years of the 1960s. The Comanches brought Piper into the modern era, and the decision to manufacture them probably helped save the company from obsolescence and financial difficulty. Having built its reputation as a builder of primarily tube-and-fabric singles, the late 1950s were an opportune time to redefine Piper as a company more geared to high-performance, sleeker-looking airplanes. Although its Cubs, Cruisers, Super Cruisers, Family Cruisers, Clippers, Pacers, and Tri-Pacers had won terrific followings and were classic airplanes in their own time, they reeked of the past. They evoked warm and fuzzy feelings and had cuddly names, but they were also slow and dowdy looking compared to competing designs from Cessna, Beech, and others. Next to Beech's popular Bonanza, North American's Navion, and Mooney's M20s, Piper's products looked like warmed-over relics from pre-World War II - which they were.

The same held true for Piper's only twin-engine offering in the 1950s, the Apache. Cessna's 310 and Beech's Twin Bonanza, Barons, and Travel Air flew rings around the under powered Apache and, frankly, looked sexier, too. Piper's Aztec, introduced in 1960, was an attempt to counter the competition's higher performance piston twins. But what really had Piper worried was the Beech Travel Air, a classy-looking, entry-level light twin with 180-hp engines and the potential to take over the twin-trainer market. So Piper's marching orders were clear. By 1957, it clearly saw an opportunity for sales of a high-performance, all-metal design with advanced airfoils that would: (a) offer a modern look; (b) have cruise speeds and useful loads comparable to the competition; (c) have interior designs with more comfort features than ever before offered in a Piper; and (d) sell for less than the competition. The result was the Comanche single.

The Comanche's laminar-flow airfoil and all-flying stabilator were viewed as something akin to technical marvels at the time, and these features in particular generated a fair amount of publicity in the press and considerable customer draw. Buyers in 1958 had a choice between two Comanche singles - one powered by a 180 hp engine, and one with a 250 hp powerplant. The 180 hp version, typically equipped, sold for $17,850 and could cruise at 139 knots (159 mph) - a really good buy for the money, even in those days, when Cessna 182s with 230 hp engines, 141 knot (162 mph) cruise speeds, and $20,200 price tags were the closest competition - and they had fixed gear. The 250 hp Comanche, the biggest seller of the line, offered even more bang for the buck.

Aimed directly at the Bonanza, the 1958 PA24-250 Comanche went for an average equipped price of just $21,250 and cruised at an honest 157 knots (180 mph). The 1958 J35 Bonanza typically came with a $28,890 bill of sale and cruised at 174 knots (200 mph). Both were powered by 250 hp engines, both had 1,000 lb useful loads, yet the Comanche cost $8,000 less. True, the Bonanza cruised 17 knots (20 mph) faster. But for more than 2,500 customers, the price/performance trade-off was an acceptable one. In subsequent years, the Comanche single line was expanded. The 260 series brought two more rear windows, six seats, a sleek looking cowl, more power from its 260 hp engine, and optional turbocharging. There were never any "fuselage plugs" or stretch of the fuselage aft of the firewall on any model Comanche, twin or single.

The Comanche 400 came with a huge eight-cylinder engine and 400 hp. With the boosts in power came greater true airspeeds and performance and useful loads that equaled or exceeded the competition's, and yet Comanche singles were nearly always priced lower. Almost immediately, the Comanche singles were labeled the "poor man's Bonanza." To use an automotive analogy of those days, if the Bonanza was the Cadillac Fleetwood, the Comanche was the Chevrolet Impala. Distinctive, yet less prestigious than the Bonanza, the Comanche spoke to those who wanted to go fast as well as save a little money, and have an airplane with ramp appeal in the bargain. Thus was born the Comanche-as-bargain-hunter's-delight concept. Buyers saw the Comanche as a way of flying with style and without too much regret. The same might be said of the PA-30 Twin Comanche, which sold for $41,190 in 1963 (the year of its debut), and cruised at 169 knots (194 mph).

Average-equipped Beech Travel Airs of that vintage went for $66,800 and cruised at 174 knots (200 mph). Faced with a whopping $24,000 price differential for a speed advantage of a mere 6-mph, the market leapt on the Twin Comanche-and for good reason. Its 160 hp engines sipped fuel (fuel flows at high-speed cruise of 14 gph - for both engines - are not uncommon in earlier Twin Comanches), and the Travel Air's 180 hp powerplants routinely ran at some 20 gph fuel flows at high cruise power settings. Piper eagerly touted the Twin Comanche for its economy, a marketing strategy intended to win over the twin-trainer and single-engine step-up markets. It worked. Many flight schools purchased Twin Comanches as multiengine trainers. By the early 1970s, Comanches and Twin Comanches had lost some of their luster in the new marketplace. A long, humbling series of major airworthiness directives (ADs) had hurt the Comanche singles.

Once considered examples of advanced design, critics turned to calling Comanches just the opposite, claiming bad workmanship and a piecemeal, bandage approach to ADs. Safety issues also became major concerns. In its early years, Comanches suffered a number of in-flight airframe failures and many landing accidents, a good number of which were overshoots. The Comanche's laminar flow wing makes for a slippery airplane. This means that airspeed can get out of hand during descents and unusual attitudes, and that the airplane can float during landings. The answer is for the pilot to think ahead of the airplane and practice proper airspeed and configuration control. This is something that all pilots of high-performance, complex singles should learn, and the Comanche is no exception. The Twin Comanche came under special scrutiny because of a number of fatal low-altitude stalls and rollovers. These typically occurred on training flights and were blamed on Vmc demonstrations and engine-out maneuvers gone bad. Prior to 1967, multiengine flight instructors and FAA examiners routinely asked students to perform single-engine stalls and other hair-raising maneuvers with an engine out.

Given these circumstances, the AOPA Air Safety Foundation believes that the disproportionate involvement of Twin Comanches in fatal Vmc and engine-out accidents in those days is more representative of unsafe training practices and the numbers of Twin Comanches in the training fleet than it is of any deficiencies in the airplane per se. But false ideas sometimes take on lives of their own and, given enough time, become legend. Today, many pilots retain the notion that the Twin Comanche is somehow still inherently dangerous. Other pressures also helped force the Comanche and Twin Comanche out of production. These airplanes were very labor intensive, had high parts counts, and were just plain expensive to build. Plans were in the works to do away with the Comanche and Twin Comanche well before Hurricane Agnes flooded the Susquehanna River and inundated the Lock Haven plant in June 1972. Piper said that production of any more Comanches and Twin Comanches wouldn't be feasible, because the tooling and dies for the Comanche and Twin Comanche were destroyed in the flood.

A convenient excuse, perhaps, but in any event, Comanche production ceased with the flood, and its place was taken by the PA-28 Arrow and PA-32 Cherokee Six, Cherokee Lance, and Saratoga single engine models, all of which are built in Piper's Vero Beach, Florida, manufacturing site. These airplanes were simpler and less expensive to build. Piper didn't build another light twin for production until 1979, when it rolled out the PA-44 Seminole - which is essentially a twin-engine Arrow. Today, the Comanche and Twin Comanche line is supported by a dedicated group of enthusiasts, most of whom belong to the International Comanche Society (ICS). The ICS's staff and its official publication, 'The Comanche Flyer," can be considered the world's preeminent source of information regarding Comanche and Twin Comanche maintenance issues, as well as parts supplies and modifications. As for initial and recurrent training, several training organizations offer type-specific flight training geared to Comanches and Twin Comanches. Parts by Piper Aircraft Model – Aviation Sourcing Solution More Browse Parts by piper Aircraft Model Piper Aircraft, Inc. is one of the most renowned companies within the general aviation industry.

Along with Cessna and Beechcraft, Piper was one of the “Big Three” manufacturers during the golden age of general aviation. Originally established in 1927 as the Taylor Brothers Aircraft Manufacturing Company, the company was renamed when William T. Piper assumed control in 1937. As a result of his leadership, Piper’s namesake company is responsible for a number of seminal models including the legendary Piper Cub line, a tube and fabric single engine aircraft which has garnered a substantial cult following. Since then the company has sold over 130,000 units with an individual model’s production levels numbering well over 30,000. Some of the company’s most produced aircraft include: the PA-23 Apache (6,976 units), PA-32 Cherokee Six (7,842+), PA-18 Super Cub (9,000+), PA-20/22 Pacer/Tri-Pacer (10,000+), J-3 Cub (20,000+), and the top-selling PA-28 Cherokee (32,000+).

Piper Aircraft’s expansive and enormously prolific product portfolio is largely composed of light utility aircraft used in a variety of roles. The company currently offers products within three categories of aircraft: M-Class (high performance, single engine light aircraft), Trainer Class (aircraft designed for pilot training), and Twin Class (aircraft powered by two piston engines).

History - Piper Piper Pratt & Whitney PT6A-42A, 600 shp Six Seats 274 ktas / 507 km/h Max Cruise 1,484 nm / 2,668 km Range Garmin G3000 Avionics Suite Pratt & Whitney PT6A-42A, 500 shp Six Seats 260 ktas / 482 km/h Max Cruise 1,000 nm / 1,852 km Range Garmin G1000 Avionics Suite 213 ktas / 395 km/h Max Cruise 1,343 nm / 2,487 km Range Garmin G1000 Avionics Suite 213 ktas / 395 km/h Max Cruise 1,343 nm / 2,487 km Range Garmin G1000 Avionics Suite (2) Continental TSIO-360-RB 220 hp ea Six Seats / Club Seating 200 ktas / 370 km/h Max Cruise 828 nm / 1,53

3 km Range Garmin G1000 Avionics Suite 162 ktas / 300 km/h 75% Power Cruise 700 nm / 1,296 km Range Garmin G1000 Avionics Suite 137 ktas / 254 km/h Max Cruise 880 nm / 1,630 km Range Garmin G500 Avionics Suite 128 ktas / 237 km/h Max Cruising 522 nm / 967 km Range Garmin G1000 Avionics Suite 123 ktas / 228 km/h 75% Power 848 nm / 1,570 km Range Garmin G1000 Avionics Suite 115 ktas / 217 km/h Max Cruise 513 nm / 950 km Range Garmin G500 Avionics Suite History IT ALL STARTED WITH A YELLOW AIRPLANE When Mr.

Piper introduced the Piper Cub in 1937, he had a dream. He felt that everyone should fly. And he believed that Piper could provide everyone with that freedom. 130,000 aircraft later, that dream lives on. Today, Piper Aircraft is the only general aviation manufacturer to offer a complete line of aircraft. From rugged, reliable trainers to a high-performance turboprop, from student pilot to experienced aviator Piper creates the freedom of flight for everyone. Aircraft

Question: Which aviation company manufactured the Cherokee, Comanche and Seminole light aircraft?
Answer: Piper